Withrow v. Williams

Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Fifth Amendment Miranda v. Arizona arguments can be raised again in federal habeas corpus proceedings, even if a criminal defendant had a fair chance to argue those claims in state court.[1] The Court rejected the state's argument that Stone v. Powell, a case holding the opposite in the context of Fourth Amendment claims on habeas review, applied in Williams' case.[2]

Withrow v. Williams
Argued November 3, 1992
Decided April 21, 1993
Full case namePamela Withrow, Petitioner v. Robert Allen Williams, Jr.
Citations507 U.S. 680 (more)
113 S. Ct. 1745; 123 L. Ed. 2d 407; 1993 U.S. LEXIS 2980; 61 U.S.L.W. 4352; 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 2893; 93 Daily Journal DAR 4974; 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 191
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
Byron White · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Case opinions
MajoritySouter, joined by unanimous (part III); White, Blackmun, Stevens, Kennedy (parts I, II, IV)
Concur/dissentO'Connor, joined by Rehnquist
Concur/dissentScalia, joined by Thomas

See also

References

  1. Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680, 694-95 (1993).
  2. Withrow, 507 U.S. at 682-83.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.